Agile Minimal Viable Product - Skateboard vs. Car

[@TonyBlount]

This is a perfect example. This is essentially what Rivian did. Coincidentally they created the “skateboard” platform first for batteries and motors that was transferable to multiple future vehicle designs. This is how they got Amazon buy-in and funding before they even delivered their own pick-up

[@gabisblog1219]

Great analogy, I may have to use it in a future interview

[@benedixtify]

I hate to say this, but I think this message could have been conveyed in 30 seconds, rather than 8 minutes.

[@stanleyaloh5590]

Mark shead has been a great influence to my career. Thanks

[@MarkShead]

Great to hear!

[@leeamraa]

I disagree! One major point this anology sketch is missing is the significant and radical difference from one stage to another!!!!! this NOT how software evolves!!! from a sakteboard magically to a bike, then motorcycle then to a CAR!!!! this is nonsese . Both examples are flawed!!!

[@MarkShead]

The analogy is about building simpler functionality that provides a benefit and then growing toward complexity. Yes, it is much easier to evolve software than it is metal and rubber. The fact that focusing on delivering incrementally greater capabilities is even easier and more valuable when it comes to software should make the analogy stronger not weaker.